Re: What day is it?

On 19 Oct 2015, at 04:29, John Clark wrote: On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 4:47 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: ​​>> ​A simulation is never 100% accurate, ​> ​This not correct. In Virtue of the digitalness, a simulation can be 100% accurate, ​Only if the numbers a computer uses

Re: What day is it?

On 19 Oct 2015, at 03:22, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 17/10/2015 3:59 am, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 16 Oct 2015, at 02:36, Bruce Kellett wrote: It is the failure to clearly distinguish between these different senses of the word 'exists' that cause most of your confusion. The mathematical

Re: What day is it?

On 18 Oct 2015, at 22:37, Brent Meeker wrote: On 10/18/2015 1:53 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 15 Oct 2015, at 19:57, Brent Meeker wrote: On 10/15/2015 12:11 AM, Bruno Marchal wrote: If arithmetic is false, Church-Turing thesis makes no more sense. ?? It will make sense as an axiom in

Re: What day is it?

On 19 Oct 2015, at 05:05, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 18/10/2015 8:05 pm, Bruno Marchal wrote: On 16 Oct 2015, at 04:18, Bruce Kellett wrote: On 16/10/2015 12:53 pm, Jason Resch wrote: On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 7:36 PM, Bruce Kellett wrote: Two different meanings of

Re: Proof, Truth and Physics

On Sun, Oct 18, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Jason Resch wrote: ​>> ​ >> In this case even mathematicians, even mathematicians who specialize in >> number theory, would give physics the last word in determining what is true >> and what is not, >> > > ​> ​ > It would not be physics that